Federal Trade Commission v. Next-Gen, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri
DecidedJuly 17, 2018
Docket4:18-cv-00128
StatusUnknown

This text of Federal Trade Commission v. Next-Gen, Inc. (Federal Trade Commission v. Next-Gen, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Federal Trade Commission v. Next-Gen, Inc., (W.D. Mo. 2018).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) No. 4:18-cv-00128-DGK ) NEXT-GEN, INC. et al., ) ) Defendants. )

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER WITH ASSET FREEZE, APPOINTMENT OF A TEMPORARY RECEIVER, AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF, AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE

The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Missouri (together “Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint for Permanent Injunction and Other Equitable Relief pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 53(b), and Sections 407.020, et seq., of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (“MMPA”). (Doc. 1). Plaintiffs have also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order, asset freeze, other equitable relief, and an order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not issue against Defendants Next-Gen, Inc.; Westport Enterprises, Inc.; Opportunities Unlimited Publications, Inc.; Opportunities Management Co.; Summit Management Team, LLC; Contest America Publishers, Inc.; Reveal Publications, LLC; AOSR Corporation, formerly known as Subscription Reporter Corporation, formerly known as Sweepstakes Reporter Co., Inc.; Lighthouse FLA Enterprises, LLC; Gamer Designs, LLC; Kevin R. Brandes; and William J. Graham (collectively “Defendants”). (Doc. 2). Defendants have filed Suggestions in Opposition (Doc. 32), and Plaintiffs have filed Reply Suggestions (Doc. 36). The Court, having considered the Complaint, the Motion for a Temporary Restraining

Order, declarations, exhibits, and the suggestions filed in support thereof and any opposition thereto, finds that: A. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case, and there is good cause to believe that it will have jurisdiction over all parties hereto and that venue in this district is proper. B. There is good cause to believe that Defendants have engaged in and are likely to engage in acts or practices that violate Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), and Section 407.020 of the MMPA, and that Plaintiffs are therefore likely to prevail on the merits of this action. Plaintiffs have established a likelihood of success in showing that:

 Defendants have distributed through the mail, to consumers throughout the United States and abroad, deceptive (1) sweepstakes notifications, (2) so-called “games of skill,” and (3) newsletter subscription solicitations.  Defendants’ mailers give consumers the false impression that they have won, or are likely to win, a substantial cash prize that the consumers must pay a fee to obtain.  Since 2013, the Defendants have taken in at least $110 million from consumers via their mailers. C. There is good cause to believe that immediate and irreparable harm will result from

Defendants’ ongoing violations of the FTC Act and the MMPA unless Defendants are restrained and enjoined by order of this Court. D. There is good cause to believe that immediate and irreparable damage to the Court’s ability to grant effective final relief for consumers—including monetary restitution, rescission, concealment by Defendants of their assets or records, unless Defendants are immediately

restrained and enjoined by order of this Court. E. Good cause exists for appointing a temporary receiver over the Receivership Entities, freezing Defendants’ assets, and permitting Plaintiffs and the Receiver to take expedited discovery. F. Weighing the equities and considering Plaintiffs’ likelihood of ultimate success on the merits, a temporary restraining order with an asset freeze, the appointment of a temporary receiver, expedited discovery, and other equitable relief is in the public interest. G. This Court has authority to issue this Order pursuant to Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 53(b); Section 407.100 of the MMPA; Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65; and the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651.

H. No security is required of any agency of the United States for issuance of a temporary restraining order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(c). DEFINITIONS A. “Asset” means any legal or equitable interest in, right to, or claim to, any property, wherever located and by whomever held. B. “Corporate Defendants” means Next-Gen, Inc.; Westport Enterprises, Inc.; Opportunities Unlimited Publications, Inc.; Opportunities Management Co.; Summit Management Team, LLC; Contest America Publishers, Inc.; Reveal Publications, LLC; AOSR Corporation; Lighthouse FLA Enterprises, LLC; and Gamer Designs, LLC; and each of their subsidiaries,

affiliates, successors, and assigns. C. “Defendant(s)” means Corporate Defendants and Individual Defendants, individually, collectively, or in any combination. “document” and “electronically stored information” in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a), Fed.

R. Civ. P. 34(a), and includes writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, sound and video recordings, images, Internet sites, web pages, websites, electronic correspondence, including e- mail and instant messages, contracts, accounting data, advertisements, FTP Logs, Server Access Logs, books, written or printed records, handwritten notes, telephone logs, telephone scripts, receipt books, ledgers, personal and business canceled checks and check registers, bank statements, appointment books, computer records, customer or sales databases and any other electronically stored information, including Documents located on remote servers or cloud computing systems, and other data or data compilations from which information can be obtained directly or, if necessary, after translation into a reasonably usable form. A draft or non-identical copy is a separate document within the meaning of the term.

E. “Electronic Data Host” means any person or entity in the business of storing, hosting, or otherwise maintaining electronically stored information. This includes, but is not limited to, any entity hosting a website or server, and any entity providing “cloud based” electronic storage. F. “Individual Defendant(s)” means Kevin R. Brandes and William J. Graham, individually, collectively, or in any combination. G. “Receiver” means the temporary receiver appointed in Section XII of this Order and any deputy receivers that shall be named by the temporary receiver. H. “Receivership Entities” means (1) the Corporate Defendants and (2) any other

entity that has conducted any business related to the Defendants’ distribution of deceptive sweepstakes or other prize mailers, including receipt of Assets derived from any activity that is the by any Defendant.

ORDER I.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cumulus Media, Inc. v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc.
304 F.3d 1167 (Eleventh Circuit, 2002)
Charette v. Town of Oyster Bay
159 F.3d 749 (Second Circuit, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Federal Trade Commission v. Next-Gen, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-trade-commission-v-next-gen-inc-mowd-2018.